Jump to content
David

The Politics Thread 2019

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

I think if he gets Brexit over the line he wins convincingly not long after..... if he doesn’t get it by Oct 31st..... 4 party politics happen. He wouldn’t be given up power that easily..... firmly believe it will happen

I do not believe the Lib Dem support will be concentrated enough to make any significant impact other than taking a few seats from the Tories (which of course may cause another hung parliament), but I do believe if he actually sorts Brexit out and Labour don't change their leader the Tories will be heading for a landslide. I would rather prefer the Lib Dems to take over as number 2, but I don't think it will happen - could be wrong though and they may very well benefit enormously from Labours tepid campaigns of late. I would also expect the SNP to improve their performance in another GE.

I don't think it is possible for Labour to form a majority on their own as long as Corbyn is in charge. His policies are old fashioned and will not resonate with most voters. The only areas of support that the Labour party managed to cling on to in the last election correspond closely to the old coal mining areas primarily in the north midlands/South Yorkshire/North East/North West/South Wales plus London who will never vote for anyone else. Now his party are pushing him to take a more pro-EU stance I don't think it will go down well in any of those areas bar London, but best of luck to them. Many traditional labour voters hated New Labour, but I genuinely think the only way they will ever form a government without a coalition will be if another Tony Blair type MP becomes party leader and takes them back in that direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Norman said:

Because the bloke will not stand by what he believes.

He decides to do what keeps him in a job.

I think we both know he would be out on his arse if he stood by what he believed. 

It's funny watching the lefties accusing people like Farage and TR of doing things for personal gain, while a person that epitomizes the description of a career politician presides over the Labour party. 

34 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Very good points. Out if interest did he call for an election when blair saw the writing on the wall and handed over to brown? Im assuming he must of done so otherwise his call for an election today would only be considered as an opportunity for personal gain rather than a true belief an election is required.

 Of course we all know the answer to this. His comments today about surprising everyone with a no confidence vote should be an embarrassment to himself and his party. Does he not realise the country have had enough of stupid political games and want it sorted one way or the other? No problem with him tabling a vote of no confidence but, if thats his plan, do it tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, TuffLuff said:

I hope the name Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe haunts him for the entire time he’s PM. 

Not a day should go by without that name being brought up

Except you do realize she works/worked for the Thomson-Reuters Foundation whose avowed mission (removed from their website a few months after her arrest) was training Arab journalists to adopt Western journalism practices. 

Do you honestly think that Boris plucked the "training journalists" remark out of thin air? Of course he didn't. If we want our politicians to speak the truth to parliamentary committees those committees should happen in private. Unfortunately there were journos there who thought it would be a good idea to report the remarks widely. 

No surprise as every journo I know would sell their grandmother for a scoop. So they'd certainly sell NZR down the river without a second thought. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Needlesh said:

A fair post chap. The 1500 years I mention reflects the whole tumultuous history of Ireland, a badland on the edge of Europe for centuries before the Vikings, before Britain was even considered as a potential unified whole.

One thing I'll stand on though...I absolutely forgive all imperialism up to WW2 from any and all parties. Thereafter it became apparent that the world has moved on. You can't judge yesterday by today's standards. What do we do today which we accept but will be abhorrent in 100 years? Single use plastic, certainly. Fossil fuels? Religion? Abortion, maybe? 

Well thanks for that description! 😂 Probably accurate enough though! Although 500 AD would have been just about the start of the Golden Age for Gaelic civilization and the whole island would have been somewhat unified under the High King at Tara. Sort of. Anyway enough of all that.

I don't forgive imperialism, nor it's enabler racism, without which empires could never have been built by nations that probably viewed themselves as good.  Unless the empire builders saw the conquered as inferior they could never have justified their actions.  But that's not to say that anybody alive today needs to feel remotely guilty about what people did in the past.  And given different historical circumstances the conquered would probably been just as happy to do the conquering had the opportunity arose..... just human nature playing out unfortunately.

But we still need to realize that empire building was wrong, the legacies of it that can still resonate today, and not to do anything like that ever again. Not really sure of the reason for your precise 1939 arrival of collective national responsibility. Seems quite arbitrary.  Why not make it 1945 and give the Germans a break? 😉

Your last question about what things we do now that will be considered abhorrent in the future is a very interesting one.  I think the way we treat domesticated animals is something we might look back on with shame (I say that while shoving a bacon roll into my face). Fossil fuel usage after we learned the damage they were doing will just be seen as stupid and short-sighted. Religion...delusional but understandable in some ways.

 

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

Except you do realize she works/worked for the Thomson-Reuters Foundation whose avowed mission (removed from their website a few months after her arrest) was training Arab journalists to adopt Western journalism practices. 

Do you honestly think that Boris plucked the "training journalists" remark out of thin air? Of course he didn't. If we want our politicians to speak the truth to parliamentary committees those committees should happen in private. Unfortunately there were journos there who thought it would be a good idea to report the remarks widely. 

No surprise as every journo I know would sell their grandmother for a scoop. So they'd certainly sell NZR down the river without a second thought. 

I’m confused, so he said something irresponsible, where journalists were present, that has help put a british citizen into jeopardy...and that’s not his fault?

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, 1967Ram said:

Isn't she innocent until proven guilty? I've heard nothing about any upcoming trial?

You are talking about the UK, she was under Iranian law so goes by their rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, bcnram said:

You are talking about the UK, she was under Iranian law so goes by their rules. 

In Iran, Article 37 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran states: "Innocence is to be presumed, and no one is to be held guilty of a charge unless his or her guilt has been established by a competent court".

Not that I agree with some of their interpretations of what is a crime and what isn't, but they do seem to hold to the notion of innocent until proven guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GenBr said:

I don't think it is possible for Labour to form a majority on their own as long as Corbyn is in charge. His policies are old fashioned and will not resonate with most voters.

I think many of his policies do resonate with plenty of voters. It just seems after some initial momentum (pardon the pun) Corbyn day's seem numbered. Some of this is his fault, but he has been destroyed by a hostile media running scared he might actually be able to beat the hapless Tories.

I think a more popular leader with similar policies and a clear Remain/soft Brexit position could smash the Tories in a General Election. Keir Starmer seems reasonable and I like Jess Phillips and Emily Thornberry. Those two seem normal.

If Johnson does crash us on 31st and things go mental, maybe we'll see Parliament oust the blond liar themselves and form a temporary emergency government. Hopefully that will even happen before we self-destruct. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Needlesh said:

True, if you want to undermine the leader of our country at the moment of our greatest crisis since, arguably, WWII. A solid, united parliament and country would put £ in your pocket, relative to what we're actually going to get.

Any politician who's been in the game for a few years gets some dirt on his boots. It's a dirty business.

 

@GboroRam Wondering why the laugh? Don't mind at all if you think I'm talking rubbish...often do...but surely it's self-evident that a country divided fares worse than a country united. Like Boris or not, surely having him succeed beats having him fail, and having him succeed means our nation thrives, and surely throwing mud at him 'every day' as was suggested won't help?

Don't want to be precious, just don't understand the reaction. Educate me man!

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Keir Starmer seems reasonable and I like Jess Phillips and Emily Thornberry. Those two seem normal.

I love that politics has come down to this, who seems normal, that's all we want now, someone normal 😂

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Needlesh said:

@GboroRam Wondering why the laugh? Don't mind at all if you think I'm talking rubbish...often do...but surely it's self-evident that a country divided fares worse than a country united. Like Boris or not, surely having him succeed beats having him fail, and having him succeed means our nation thrives, and surely throwing mud at him 'every day' as was suggested won't help?

Don't want to be precious, just don't understand the reaction. Educate me man!

I'm sure you'd be advocating getting behind Corbyn should he manage a miracle and get into power. Of course that won't happen because his MPs can't even get behind him. 

I never got behind Blair, despite voting for him. Why would I get behind a man who I know I can't trust with the NHS?. 

That's according to an ex Tory PM, not a liberal lefty know-nothing do-gooder SJW, by the way. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

Except you do realize she works/worked for the Thomson-Reuters Foundation whose avowed mission (removed from their website a few months after her arrest) was training Arab journalists to adopt Western journalism practices. 

Do you honestly think that Boris plucked the "training journalists" remark out of thin air? Of course he didn't. If we want our politicians to speak the truth to parliamentary committees those committees should happen in private. Unfortunately there were journos there who thought it would be a good idea to report the remarks widely. 

No surprise as every journo I know would sell their grandmother for a scoop. So they'd certainly sell NZR down the river without a second thought. 

 

9 hours ago, TuffLuff said:

I’m confused, so he said something irresponsible, where journalists were present, that has help put a british citizen into jeopardy...and that’s not his fault?

 

and on that basis...doesn't it show his lack political/diplomatic skills by telling the Ayatollas what they wanted to hear ?

Especially when, allegedly, he did not read or misread his brief.  

The Times cartoon

 

image.thumb.png.b26475bba4cd45eef90660e594c8fbbe.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, ariotofmyown said:

I think many of his policies do resonate with plenty of voters. It just seems after some initial momentum (pardon the pun) Corbyn day's seem numbered. Some of this is his fault, but he has been destroyed by a hostile media running scared he might actually be able to beat the hapless Tories.

I think a more popular leader with similar policies and a clear Remain/soft Brexit position could smash the Tories in a General Election. Keir Starmer seems reasonable and I like Jess Phillips and Emily Thornberry. Those two seem normal.

If Johnson does crash us on 31st and things go mental, maybe we'll see Parliament oust the blond liar themselves and form a temporary emergency government. Hopefully that will even happen before we self-destruct. 

I would only agree that his desire to end austerity would resonate with any significant proportion of voters. His aim to raise already ludicrously high income taxes is never going to be popular and that would be enough for most voters. As i said previously he has only really managed to hold the old mining areas that will never vote anything else. It wont be enough to win a GE. His failure to pick a side on Brexit especially is pushing a lot of former labour supporters over to the Lib Dems 

One of the reasons Blair managed to become so popular was that he had a very strong media team himself. Corbyn is a disaster on that front, he either responds too slowly, not at all or doesn't go far enough with a wishy washy statement. If he had a better team around him he may have been more successful. There are a number of quality MPs in the Labour party who could lead them to a general election ( please not dianne abbott) victory, but personally i think they need to change leader immediately to stand any chance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, GenBr said:

I would only agree that his desire to end austerity would resonate with any significant proportion of voters. His aim to raise already ludicrously high income taxes is never going to be popular and that would be enough for most voters. As i said previously he has only really managed to hold the old mining areas that will never vote anything else. It wont be enough to win a GE. His failure to pick a side on Brexit especially is pushing a lot of former labour supporters over to the Lib Dems 

One of the reasons Blair managed to become so popular was that he had a very strong media team himself. Corbyn is a disaster on that front, he either responds too slowly, not at all or doesn't go far enough with a wishy washy statement. If he had a better team around him he may have been more successful. There are a number of quality MPs in the Labour party who could lead them to a general election ( please not dianne abbott) victory, but personally i think they need to change leader immediately to stand any chance.

 

Interesting line, strange when you consider the Labour party did not contest the chancellors 40% tax income threshold changes last year. The only real change they want is on the top 5% of earners, people earning less than 80k per year realistically will barely see a difference. But this is how propaganda works I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Uptherams said:
19 hours ago, 1967Ram said:

Where she went wrong was by trying to 'do BREXIT' as a party political venture. She went wrong by not finding out what was accepatble to Parliament as a whole before she set her red lines. IMO of course.

 

19 hours ago, Uptherams said:

Nah she ducked up the 2017 GE, that's what she did. Let's not rewrite history. 

funny how quickly we forget.  Called an election which wounded her then appointed David Davis to oversee negotiations and by the time she realised he'd ducked it up it was too late to salvage anything.  I am not a supporter of Brexit but if more had been done in that wasted period then there would have been a chance to get some sort of deal.  There would have been sticking points but there was a great deal that could have been agreed and voted on before we got to all or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, tomsdubs said:

Interesting line, strange when you consider the Labour party did not contest the chancellors 40% tax income threshold changes last year. The only real change they want is on the top 5% of earners, people earning less than 80k per year realistically will barely see a difference. But this is how propaganda works I guess.

Just because it doesn't fit with your world view does not make it propaganda. Raising taxes is unpopular - deal with it. It doesn't matter who he is raising taxes for it will be unpopular. Perhaps saying majority of voters is a bit of an overstatement, but it won't go down well anywhere in Toryland -  i.e everywhere south of Leicester. I also don't want corporation tax increases or re-nationalisation.

Whilst I am aware that most of the members of this forum are borderline communists who don't believe anyone should be earning more than £50k per year and that all wealth should be confiscated by the government upon death it is not a view I share. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Spanish said:

 

funny how quickly we forget.  Called an election which wounded her then appointed David Davis to oversee negotiations and by the time she realised he'd ducked it up it was too late to salvage anything.  I am not a supporter of Brexit but if more had been done in that wasted period then there would have been a chance to get some sort of deal.  There would have been sticking points but there was a great deal that could have been agreed and voted on before we got to all or nothing.

I think the ‘Hard Brexit’ stance was unnecessary, similar to saying ‘no deal’ is a negotiating tactic now. In part because the 52/48 split didn’t warrant it but also because I believe the EU haven’t exactly been difficult negotiators despite what the papers would let you believe. It was in the EU’s interest to negotiate a deal that worked for everyone and also protected EU citizens in the UK. 

A soft approach was more than adequate, by trying to compensate for hard liners in the Conservative Party and beyond did nothing for May’s leadership. By letting it drag on it only gave Rees Moggs/Farage’s of the world more of a voice.

Basically between them all, the Tories made a huge mess of all this and it’s all their own doing

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

I think the ‘Hard Brexit’ stance was unnecessary, similar to saying ‘no deal’ is a negotiating tactic now. In part because the 52/48 split didn’t warrant it but also because I believe the EU haven’t exactly been difficult negotiators despite what the papers would let you believe. It was in the EU’s interest to negotiate a deal that worked for everyone and also protected EU citizens in the UK. 

A soft approach was more than adequate, by trying to compensate for hard liners in the Conservative Party and beyond did nothing for May’s leadership. By letting it drag on it only gave Rees Moggs/Farage’s of the world more of a voice.

Basically between them all, the Tories made a huge mess of all this and it’s all their own doing

Not in the slightest. It has always been in the interests of the EU to make the process as difficult and scary for us as they could, in order to put off any other country from thinking about doing the same.

A perfectly logical policy as well.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.